Besides if any employer can pick and choose who to retrench its just open to corruption and getting rid of people they don't like! And thats why poor little Johnny got sent packing to the invisible land in the last election!

Such a terrible idea allowing employers to retrench people who don't provide value for money through their labour. News flash: Managers don't like people who cost more than the value they produce to the company. It should be a companies right to retrench these people within the law. Economic times have changed and some in the organisation cost more than they contribute. A seniority list doesn't rank people on the value they provide to the company.

The only people who support your idea are those that know they are overpaid for what they do or don't fully comprehend the financial situation.

Your comment says more about your work ethic than it does about "corruption".

QANTAS needs to cut costs - and cut them fast. AJ has commenced doing what is required and good on him.

It should be a companies right to retrench these people within the law.

Thank you very much for reinforcing my comment, an Enterprise Bargaining Agreement (EBA) is a law abiding contract. And that is why companies do have a right to retrench staff operating under an EBA within the law. I am humbled by your support! Thank you!

Excellent response. You highlight what I think about some of the inclusions in the union EBA(s) and the damage they can cause. It's a problem when EBAs go through that cause this effect during times like this. They compound the problem.

Some guys will lose their job despite providing more worth to the company than others who will keep theirs. I feel sorry for them.

It's a shame anyone has to lose their jobs, but QF is just not in a cost or market position to fight a two-front war (EK, EY, QR on the one hand; LAX routes on the other). I believe the LAX routes generate the bulk of QF profits, so opening those up creates an immediate black hole for the carrier. They probably should have seen it coming a bit better on the aircraft orders front, but hind-sight always 20/20.

Any of you who believe your EBA guaranteed straight-line seniority will be protected in times of economic crisis must also believe in the Tooth Fairy.

The precedent has been set. Firstly with Kendell back in 2001, and currently with VB and its Boeing drivers.

Your company will run a case in the IRC claiming it will be "fatally wounded" if straight line seniority is permitted to prevail (as Kendell did) and the IRC will grant the company's wish in the blink of an eye.

I don't believe it's right, but I can almost guarantee you, that's the way it will be.

My prediction is that in the unlikely event that QF retrenches flight crew, that it will be fleet based - not seniority based.

Last edited by Hugh Jarse; 14th Apr 2009 at 09:35.
Reason: Some clarification

Today's news isn't good but if the hard decisions are not made now, in 18 months time, all employees might be out of a job.

Now the attention turns to who goes.

But yes, I agree that HR should be looked at first. Also, does the airline really need all of those finance people? With aircraft grounded, a few crew might be the first looked at. You would hope that engineering is last on the agenda - they have already copped a lot. I think you will find a lot of the decisions will rely on how many people take the leave etc.

As yes, that Warehouse of Excellence (great name whoever came up with it! ).........not only a waste of money but it is wasting a whole day when people could actually be working.

You highlight what I think about some of the inclusions in the union EBA(s) and the damage they can cause.

And an EBA is agreed contract between Company and Union. If the companies think its so damaging then they would'nt agree with it in the first place. Right?

For your information these provisions have been in most EBA agreements for decades let alone just recent time. If you'd rather be on an individual contract in these times go ahead I am just pointing out the obvious. Personally I would hate to be on an individual contract at the moment it would be a killing field. I am just pointing out the advantages of a Collective Agreement that was lost on a lot of people in the last several years of boom times.

Some guys will lose their job despite providing more worth to the company than others who will keep theirs. I feel sorry for them

That's right, and this is why seniority sucks. There are a lot of seat warmers, oxygen thieves, dead-wood, 'professional' First and Second Officers, CSS and so on preventing the progress of others who are certainly more productive and have more talent and potential. Why should these latter people be sacrificed in the name of seniority? It's time, people, to think a little outside the square!

FliteG -- I don't really buy the "we didn't know it was coming" argument. Dixon has been squaking about Emirates and the other Gulf carriers for years, to no avail. So if he knew they were such a problem, why were all the QF aircraft ordered? Likewise, the LAX services. Over-reliance on a route duopoly in an ever-liberalizing world is not clever strategically. Weakening in demand is a global problem at the moment, but QF problems go well beyond just the current economic situation.